In essence, this says if the gov’t suspects and accuses a US citizen of being a terrorist then they can legally detain indefinitely said US citizen. No Miranda Right, no due process, no right to an attorney. Just a ticket to Cuba… or one of the FEMA camps set up in the US.

This will kill our Constitutional Rights and you have to wonder how much longer we’ll have such things as the right to bear arms.

Obama has been just as bad, if not worse than Bush on civil liberties. It's depressing really that the only reversal to this trend lies in Ron Paul, who's other ideas will keep him from ever being elected sadly.

Well... Remember how the US started... Maybe it's time for something drastic to happen. Certainly seems like it's going in the way of something drastic needing to happen. Don't get me wrong. I love this country and what it's supposed to stand for. It's my home and I realize how lucky I was comparatively to grow up here. What I don't like, and haven't liked since I started paying even the remotest attention to it, is the government that's running all of this. As it is, it's nothing like it was originally intended to be, and I'm not talking about the rights of women, and people of anything other than pure Anglo-Saxon descent. Those things would have come along with social awareness.

If we're in a country in which we can charge someone with no ties to our country with TREASON, which was defined in the Constitution, (I relooked it up when that foreign kid was tried for treason a few years back. I don't remember the names, but it was all over the news.) and have it stick, when the definition required ties to the country for it to be treason, then do you really think they care about what's Constitutional or not? It's all about fear, and the control that they can create through causing fear in the masses. With that fear, and a "promise" to keep us "safe" they can get the less informed/intelligent masses to gladly put up with whatever they'd like to make them put up with. It's not clean, it's not pretty, and morally, it's pretty bankrupt, but they're politicians, what do you expect?

Hopefully that made some amount of sense, I have to walk out the door in a bit, but if I remember to, I'll look up the foreign student (I think he was a student) thing when I get a chance... In my opinion this country has been on a downward slope since the whole "War on Terror" started.

Hopefully the Judiciary will quash it. Honestly not surprised by this. Governments are made of people. People get scared/greedy/'patriotic' or otherwise irrational and as a result do stupid and terrible things.

Moreover, I hate it when people talk about the good old days and the "founding fathers'" intent. Nostalgia in America is just as guilty as other factors of skewing our political discourse and informing horrible policy. This sort of thing has happened before and will happen again. Repeatedly. Talking about it like we are in some new dark era of the violation of civil liberty in America is naive. Remember that it was only 22 years after the Declaration of Independence and 11 years after the Constitution was adopted that we passed the Alien and Sedition acts. Which makes it less than 9 years from when we adopted the Bill of Rights to when the government was actively impinging the rights of the individual due to vague fears of anti-government sentiment being inspired by a violent revolution overseas. Seems like we are pretty much following in the footsteps of our forebears.

Face it they caused us to spend a needless huge sum of money on homeland security for a relatively low level threat to our nation as a whole, we are removing key Constitutional safeguards now from even citizens just accused of Terrorism and it could get worse.

And whats worse we didn't need to do this after 9/11 airlines were immediately safer since who here if they take out guns will do what hostage takers say on an aircraft, I would likely not and aircraft have clear pilots do not open the armored door policies. We have more coorperation from other nations on the policing of terrorists and more importantly of lettting them get a nuke or serious biological agent that could be deployed. And we refocused our formidable intellignece services to the task. More money was really not needed to the degree we spent it IMHO some of course but not that. Now this!

I happen to feel this bill if he signs it will be a huge blow to the people and our allies that we will sacrifice our essential liberty out of unjustified fear of some terrorist attack.

Second, consider how typically bipartisan this all is. The Senate just voted 37-61 against an amendment, sponsored by Democratic Sen. Mark Udall, that would have stripped the Levin/McCain section from the bill: in other words, Levin/McCain garnered one more vote than the 60 needed to stave off a filibuster. Every GOP Senator (except Rand Paul and Mark Kirk) voted against the Udall amendment, while just enough Democrats – 16 in total — joined the GOP to ensure passage of Levin/McCain. That includes such progressive stalwarts as Debbie Stabenow, Sheldon Whitehouse, Jeanne Shaheen and its lead sponsor, Carl Levin.

I’ve described this little scam before as “Villain Rotation”: “They always have a handful of Democratic Senators announce that they will be the ones to deviate this time from the ostensible party position and impede success, but the designated Villain constantly shifts, so the Party itself can claim it supports these measures while an always-changing handful of their members invariably prevent it.” This has happened with countless votes that are supposed manifestations of right-wing radicalism but that pass because an always-changing roster of Democrats ensure they have the support needed. So here is the Democratic Party — led by its senior progressive National Security expert, Carl Levin, and joined by just enough of its members — joining the GOP to ensure that this bill passes, and that the U.S. Government remains vested with War on Terror powers and even expands that war in some critical respects.

...

UPDATE II: Any doubt about whether this bill permits the military detention of U.S. citizens was dispelled entirely today when an amendment offered by Dianne Feinstein — to bar the military detention of U.S. citizens — failed by a vote of 45-55. Only three Republicans voted in favor of Feinstein’s amendment (Paul, Kirk and Lee), while 10 Senate Democrats voted against it, i.e. voted to empower the President to militarily detain American citizens without charges (Levin, Stabenow, Casey, Pryor, Ben Nelson, Manchin, McCaskill, Begich and Lieberman). Remember: the GOP — all of whom except 3 voted today to empower the President to militarily detain citizens without charges — distrusts federal power and are strong believes in restrained government. Meanwhile, even The American Spectator has a more developed appreciation of due process than these Senate Democrats and the White House.

I'm not sure if Greenwald coined the term, I'd heard about the phenomenon in the 90's.

And we have Rand Paul, of all people, to thank for the bill not being worse:

SPRINGFIELD, Virginia – On Thursday night, Senator Rand Paul blocked passage of an amendment that would have allowed the government to indefinitely detain American citizens until Congress declares the War on Terror to be over. These Americans would be detained even if they were tried and found not guilty.An attempt was made to pass Amendment No. 1274 to the National Defense Authorization Act (S. 1867) by voice vote, but Senator Paul’s objection and request for a roll call vote ultimately led to the bill’s defeat by a final vote of 41-59.

That's right. 41 senators voted for indefinite detainment even of those who were found innocent.

SA 1274. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1867, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2012 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; as follows:

On page 360, between lines 17 and 18, insert the following:

(5) Notwithstanding disposition under paragraph (2) or (3), further detention under the law of war until the end of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

I'm tired of writing my congressman and senators. Tired of Calling them. This year has been one betrayal after another of oaths, promises and now the hijacking of the country. This is a betrayal of the people and it outrages me. I'm a vet, I know LOTS of serviceman that hate being made into brown shirts and bad guys. It's not what we are trained for. It's a betrayal of our oaths of service in the highest order.

I am especially saddened that men like Senator McCain who swore that same oath are now betraying it.

The sad part is I find members of the military tend to know how corrupt the government is.

Police forces? Nope, they love it. They can be extremely xenophobic, hard right wing cheerleaders of authority.

Actually my friends in law enforcement hate it too. The director of the FBI has stated worries about military involvement interfering with investigator ability to conduct investigations and members of other agencies have said similar things. It is constitutionally reprehensible and procedurally stupid, and yeah our elected officials march lockstep down the aisle to destroying the priciples our country worked on for centuries.

Hearing what Obama has done over the past four years has frightened me.

I think he's done a mix of good and bad. He started strong with policies to keep white house staff from joining the washington lobbyist crowd at the end of their time working for him. Then he tried to talk to the other party leadership. Not always successfully but at least he was willing to cross the aisle.

He's no more good or evil than any other president. He's a man and he has feet of clay just like everyone else. I saw a LOT of folks who seemed to expect him to pull out a wand after he was sworn in and wave it and all the problems of the last 10 years would POOF and vanish.

I am, having said that, very disappointed with the way he has handled the NDAA. Particularly given his history as a constitutional historian.

Actually my friends in law enforcement hate it too. The director of the FBI has stated worries about military involvement interfering with investigator ability to conduct investigations and members of other agencies have said similar things. It is constitutionally reprehensible and procedurally stupid, and yeah our elected officials march lockstep down the aisle to destroying the priciples our country worked on for centuries.

I've found most police tend to fall to the right pretty hard, I can point you to quite a few websites and forums full of them where their anonymous rantings are regularly applauded. I have one guy on my facebook that loves when OWS protesters are assaulted for example, and him and others will ignore any police brutality story, or defend it. You see it with every police brutality case "The force was justified" is always what the Chief says, because they all back each other up.

I'm not saying normal cops don't exist, my best friend is one and he does it as a job and doesn't even like it. I'm more talking about the lifers and authority lovers who taser everyone, and just thoroughly abuse their power whenever they can. There are quite a few of them.

I've found most police tend to fall to the right pretty hard, I can point you to quite a few websites and forums full of them where their anonymous rantings are regularly applauded. I have one guy on my facebook that loves when OWS protesters are assaulted for example, and him and others will ignore any police brutality story, or defend it. You see it with every police brutality case "The force was justified" is always what the Chief says, because they all back each other up.

I'm not saying normal cops don't exist, my best friend is one and he does it as a job and doesn't even like it. I'm more talking about the lifers and authority lovers who taser everyone, and just thoroughly abuse their power whenever they can. There are quite a few of them.

Most of the ones I've heard seem to dislike it for the interference with their cases it will cause. Cause if you think just gulaging someone will make things easier, I think it will make his friends a LOT more likely to run and gun when they see the next badge.

Below is the response I got from one of my Senators, Marco Rubio R-Fl. The only part I left out was my name and the initial salutation.

Quote

Thank you for writing me in regard to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA). I understand some provisions in this bill are contentious and I appreciate the opportunity to respond.

As you may know, every year the Senate Armed Services Committee presents the NDAA, which authorizes appropriations for the corresponding fiscal year, to the full Senate for consideration. The Senate passed this year's Defense Authorization Act on December 1, 2011, and following a conference committee with the House, the final version of the NDAA was passed by the Senate on December 15, 2011, by a vote 86 to 13.

I am aware this bill contains some controversial provisions related to terrorist detainees, and whether they should be held in military or civilian law enforcement custody. In particular, I am referring to Sections 1031, 1032 and 1033 of the Senate version of the NDAA. This legislation reiterates that in times of war the Armed Forces have the authority to detain terrorists in the United States if they are members of Al Qaeda or a group affiliated with Al Qaeda and/or assisted in the planning and execution of the September 11th terror attacks. During the Senate debate on the NDAA, Senator Mark Udall (CO) introduced an amendment which would have struck this language from the bill.

I voted against the Udall amendment and in favor of compromise language which states that the President already has the authority to detain individuals associated with Al Qaeda or other terror groups regardless of their citizenship. The Udall amendment failed by a vote of 37 to 61, however, the compromise language passed 99 to 1 and is contained in the final NDAA which does not change current law with regard to U.S. citizen's rights. To be clear, this NDAA does not change the Posse Comitatus Act, nor does it take away an individual's habeas corpus rights. Additionally, the language in the NDAA does not take away an individual's rights to equal protection under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, nor does it take away one's due process rights afforded under the 5th or 14th Amendments. If this bill did such a thing, I would strongly oppose it.

I believe an act of terror against the United States is an act of war, and I believe those who commit such acts of terror should be treated as enemy combatants not as common criminals. When enemy combatants who wish to harm United States citizens are captured, the rights of these detainees are restricted to basic human rights. All detainees held by the United States are treated with dignity and respect, despite the heinous crimes they have been accused of committing against our nation. I will continue to support a detention policy that protects the United States, as well as the rights of our law abiding citizens.

It is an honor and a privilege to serve you as your United States Senator. Thank you for sharing your views with me. If I can be of any help to you with regard to this issue or any other concerns of yours, please do not hesitate to contact me.

I mean essentially it's a matter of definition. Will it lead to another house committee on un-American Activities. Sure it does not change the rights of citizens unless they are "part of or substantially support Al Qaeda, the taliban or associated forces." What exactly are associated forces, and what is substantially support.

I mean essentially it's a matter of definition. Will it lead to another house committee on un-American Activities. Sure it does not change the rights of citizens unless they are "part of or substantially support Al Qaeda, the taliban or associated forces." What exactly are associated forces, and what is substantially support.

Well what happens when someone pulls a Tim mcveigh and blow up a federal building? They expand the rules to cover another group then someone does something else and the definition expands again. Are you giving support by supporting an ecology group against animal testing after some fringe Eco group burns down a lab and leaves bombs for first responders?

Mmm, in all honesty. Weird as this sounds, this is all turning into a new dark age; almost a mirror image of the fictional Warhammer 40K Imperium of Man. If it keeps going through, soon we'll be arrested for thought crimes.

So far, the majority of those in power need to go, their long years of service without fluctuation has caused them to become jaded and far more monstrous then the ones they're trying to protect the citizens from.

When one focuses solely after one particular group for so long, one begins to become just as them.

Well, my fellow Americans, you can forget Article 4 of the Bill of Rights, it's out the window now. It would seem that "due process" is rubbish. Our congress ( those non-representing representatives) has basically just anointed Obama the first KING of The United Police States of America. How quickly people forget how Castro brought down the Cuban government and brought in communism. At least he had to fire his weapon to do so, The American People Just pretty much just handed it over to Obama.

You can probably forget Article 1 of the Bill of Rights too. Freedom of speech? Bah! You'd better watch what you say and who you say it to or our government, in it's infinite wisdom and righteousness, may decide that you're a terrorist and lock you away in some military camp with no trial or attorney until the war on terror ends. And when does THAT happen? When King Obama says it's over, that's when.

This is a brave new world. Watch what you say. Be mindful of who you associate with. You may criticize your government within the privacy of your own home, amongst close family or friends, but do not post negative comments online. Do not assemble. Do not protest. Do not agitate. Do not give "comfort" to the "enemy."

We have met the enemy and he is us. This is a sad day for all of us. All of our military spending, all of our defenses, safeguards, and securities, and it turns out democracy was attacked from within, the historians will write someday. We didn't even see it coming.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he declares martial law, abolishes further presidential elections and declares himself "Fuhrer." December 21, 2012... not seeming like such a long shot for "end of an age" anymore. God help us all.

WASHINGTON -- Indefinite military detention of Americans became the law of the land Saturday, as President Barack Obama signed a defense bill that codified that authority, even as he said he would not use it.

The National Defense Authorization Act states how the military is to be funded, but also includes a number of controversial provisions on arresting and holding suspected terrorists, which at first drove Obama to threaten a veto.

He retreated from that threat after Congress added provisions that took the ultimate authority to detain suspects from the military's hands and gave it to the president. Congress also clarified that civilian law enforcement agencies -- such as the FBI -- would still have authority to investigate terrorism and added a provision that asserts nothing in the detention measures changes current law regarding U.S. citizens.

Still, the signing on New Year's Eve as few people were paying attention angered civil liberties advocates, who argue that the law for the first time spells out certain measures that have not actually been tested all the way to the Supreme Court, including the possibility of detaining citizens in military custody without trial for as long as there is a war on terror.

"President Obama's action today is a blight on his legacy because he will forever be known as the president who signed indefinite detention without charge or trial into law,” said Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

On the eve of 2012, President Obama has, with the stroke of a pen, ended America as we know it.With the National Defense Authorization Act now signed into law, American citizens can and possibly will be indefinitely detained by the military if they have been “accused” of any terrorist related activity.

In a press release published today, the ACLU further outlined their opposition to this unconstitutional law and highlighted the fact that Obama will now be known as the president who signed indefinite detention of Americans, far from any battlefield, into law.

"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts -- not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."Abraham Lincoln

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.

For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men.

He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague."